Workmen's advocate., 1887-04-16

WHV, when they could earn tllal some thing they were sure to be cut down, Does not Mir, Sargent know that his statement about the signing of the peti- ton is absolutely false? for was it not signed, "Respectfully submitted, Em- ployees of Lock Department ?' and did not Mir. Nudge on presenting the petition explain that it was so signed for the sake of convenience? Did not Mir. Nudge tell Mir, Sargent that if he would name the time, the employees would name the place where they would present their grievances and substantiate the charges set forth against Mir. Stetson? Did not Mir. Sargent say he was surprised to have any dissatisfaction in the lock de- partment, and that although he would not meet the employees in a body, he would be happy to treat with them in- ! dlvldually-in fact, that he would treat them with as much respect as if they were crowned heads? Did not Mr. Nudge tell Mr. Sargent that he did not come to his office to present his own personal grievances, but merely as a mediator be- tween him Mr. Sargent and his men, even though hy so doing he was certain ot losing hls position under Mir. Stetson And he (Mr Sargent said he would see that MT. Nudge would not suffer in any way on account of his action presenting the petition. A few days afterward Mir. Nudge was cut down in his work and left the shop whereupon his job was given to another at the same price for
 merly paid, The question now arises who Will be the next man bold enough to complain? Mr. Sargent speaks of the number of apprentices taken and the rate Of wages paid them in order thut Mey may edrH Something. Yes. we have heard about forty of those apprentices in the lock room alone since Stetson took charge last December, all of whom have long since sought new fields of labor, after remaining anywhere from one hour to one week with Mir. Sargent not wlthstanding his ''high rate of wages" AS we have few of those apprentices at present, let Us see what their high rate or wages amounts to. One is a man forty years old, with family to sup port, and he has received the very "high rate" of one dollar a day during the past two months; another thirty years old, has earned twelve dollars in three weeks; another, thirty-iive years old, after some months of faithful service, receives one dollar and twenty-five cents day; another, after two weeks of hard work has been paid three dollars, and another, after trying hard for five days to earn something, left in disgust, and was sur prlsed upon receiving sixty cents for his labor These are only few of the many cases l can cite to prove the ab- surdity of Sargent's statements.
 High rate oi wages, indeed but, pray Mr. Sargent, how long do you think it would take man, at your high rate of wages, to provide for himself and family an humble home, not to mind palace, or how long do you think it would take him to plank down $20O,0OO for New Ravens stock in the little Derby? With the working men employed by Mr Sar- gent m such a deplorable condition, l am unable to understand how he can pose before the Y. NJ. C. A. as pros porous business man. He stands as the apostle of ''free trade" but depend upon It before that doctrine can succeed in this country, those who uphold it must com mand more of the respect and confidence of the people than J. E. Sargent does. In closing l wish to say that my object Tn placing this letter before the public is not to 0btaln any justice for those who are unfortunate enough to be ground down beneath the iron heel of Stetson, Galley X Co.,, for we know we will re- celve no justice, but to present a few undenlable facts of which Mr. Sargent was well aware when he refused to meet his men as a body. As to Stetson and Galley, it will suffice to say the day will come when MT. Sargent will dispose of them wltl as little ceremony as he has allowed them to dispose of men who were thelr superiors in knowledge and principle. JusTIcE.